German court rules Motorola Xoom doesn't violate Apple's iPad patents

The Motorola Xoom tablet doesn't infringe on Apple's patented design for the iPad, a German court ruled on Tuesday.

Apple's lawsuit against Motorola was dismissed and Apple was denied its request to ban sales of the Xoom throughout the European Union, according to the Associated press. The Dusseldorf court also denied Motorola's request to invalidate Apple's community design rights for the iPad, which protect the distinctive appearance of products.

Motorola's courtroom victory isn't a major blow to Apple, as the Xoom, first released in 2011, has not had an impact on sales of the iPad. Since the launch of the Xoom, Motorola Mobility was purchased by Google for $12.5 billion.

Tuesday's outcome is similar to a U.S.-based decision from earlier this month, in which Judge Richard Posner dismissed Apple's patent infringement case against Motorola.

One key Apple-Motorola dispute that remains is with the U.S. International Trade Commission, which issued an initial ruling in April that deemed Apple violated one of four Motorola Mobility patents. The ITC has yet to review the ruling related to a Motorola Wi-Fi patent, but the commission's decision could possibly lead to an import ban on Apple products using Motorola technology.

Motorola first sued Apple in 2010 for alleged infringement on a range of wireless communications patents. The iPhone maker filed a countersuit with the ITC but the commission ultimately cleared Motorola of any wrongdoing in March.

odd that they wouldn't officially invalidate the design rights but by saying Moto didn't violate it they basically have done just that

I suspect that Apple isn't going to push on the physical design issues. Sure they would love to win and they aren't going to drop all their cases but in the end the word is out to the public and that is the court that really matters. So what if legally something can sell if everyone just sees it as a copy cat and goes for the original. It's the tech patents that Apple is more likely to keep pushing over as they should. Both as the offense and the defense. Particularly when the other side is playing games with FRAND patents

odd that they wouldn't officially invalidate the design rights but by saying Moto didn't violate it they basically have done just that

The two matters are entirely different. They did not invalidate the patent, so it is still considered valid. They simply said that the Xoom doesn't fall under the claims. That doesn't mean that another device that looks more like the iPad won't fall under the claims. See, for example, how much closer the Tab is to the iPad's design patents. It's entirely possible that the Tab will still fall under the claims of the patent.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

Compare the iPad to the Xoom to the Galaxy Tab 10.1. The Xoom and Galaxy Tab look more alike than either of them do to the iPad. I get it Apple is ticked off that at Samsung over trade dress (packaging yes, product design no). But the as much as I like Apple products the barrage of lawsuits does show real fear over competition and less about IP protection. A good number of the patents the USPTO have given should never have been issued. Judge Posner is right the system is a mess and needs MAJOR reform.

The two matters are entirely different. They did not invalidate the patent, so it is still considered valid. They simply said that the Xoom doesn't fall under the claims. That doesn't mean that another device that looks more like the iPad won't fall under the claims. See, for example, how much closer the Tab is to the iPad's design patents. It's entirely possible that the Tab will still fall under the claims of the patent.

Samsungs original tab externally looked too similar and rightfully were sued, but the OS is totally different. With the 2nd and N version of it they do not.

Apple was awarded a patent for this amazing idea today. Imagine tapping "email" and a list of emails is presented that you can scroll thru. Or perhaps touch "Music" and a scrollable list of your music appears. Brilliant! Who would have imagined it. . .

Americas? Including everything north AND south of the Mason-Dixon? Canada? South America?
America(s) is the single biggest source. It takes a combination of other countries to equal and surpass the "Americas" (but not by very much.)
In any event, If anything were to happen to Apple in the US alone, that would be a serious problem.
The single most important market, the one that can make or break your brand, is indeed the USA.

Sorry but you do seem to be clutching at straws. not sure why you feel the need to though.

Do you honestly believe that Patranus was suggesting that he is more concerned about the courts in Chile than Germany?

Whilst I would expect that Apple are more concerned about breaking China (than sales in the USA per se) I do agree that the USA is probably the most important with regard to their "make or break". Even in Apple's darkest days they were able to rely upon free global publicity from Hollywood, which meant that almost every computer seen in movies was a Mac. Those kind of global endorsements are invaluable.

I am not sure though that the USA is make or break for other phone makers. eg ZTE, ... actually most brands now that I come to think of it

Apple was awarded a patent for this amazing idea today. Imagine tapping "email" and a list of emails is presented that you can scroll thru. Or perhaps touch "Music" and a scrollable list of your music appears. Brilliant! Who would have imagined it. . .

I'm no Apple fanboy. Tallest Skil can attest to that. But after reading the patent, it is obviously valid.

The patent is NOT for displaying a list. THAT would be STUPID.

The patent actually relates to a means for allowing a user to know how far down the list they are by bringing up a scroll bar which hides itself automatically and moves in relation to where on the list the user is.

IMO, VALID. And again, read my posts, I'm no blind fanboy.

And to be fair, its not like this is the only way of letting a user know where on a list they are. You can make a percentage counter, a circle icon, there are lots of other ways, so this one isn't one of those stupid patents that people talk about that are either vague or obvious.

The way I look at it, if a work around can be found in 5 minutes (as i just did....and i really should patent that) then yeah, it should be upheld as valid cause if you just copy it, KNOWING that its patented, and lets remember that according to law you must know that you are infringing (i think) well that's just lazy on your part)

But it sure violates the hell out of the "Rectangular object with rounded edges patent"

Can't believe the court is letting motorolla get away with that. It is OBVIOUSLY a rectangle with rounded edges. The Judge must be blind.

ah... but the patent application for the rectangle had a hand with horribly distorted fingers, oh... and a man without legs. Unless John Merrick can be dug up and shown to be using the device Apple haven't got a leg to stand on (accidental pun intended)

edit _ I guess that also explains why the iTablets from 2007 that from a distance look like the ipads that would be released 3 years later were allowed to use the rectangle with rounded corners

Apple was awarded a patent for this amazing idea today. Imagine tapping "email" and a list of emails is presented that you can scroll thru. Or perhaps touch "Music" and a scrollable list of your music appears. Brilliant! Who would have imagined it. . .

Put the Tab next to the original iPad. While there are differences, it was a close enough copy that even Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference.

Now, put the Galaxy SIII next to the iPhone 4S. There's no way that their appearance can be confused.

THAT is what Apple wants to accomplish. They want to eliminate confusion and stop competitors from making near exact copies. In addition to the example above, a number of competitors have started removing Apple's patented technologies from their products. Protecting their look and feel is FAR more valuable than the cost of litigation.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

It's black and rounded like an iPad, but that's that. Different material, different quality, no one would mistake it for an iPad. It's not like those Samsung devices that, worst of all, even mimik the software.

Screw those other "countries" and their small eyed, flat nosed, funny looking people. Bunch of spooks and coons as far as I can see.

USA USA USA!!!

The USA is not what it used to be. BTW these comments are on the ruling, apple and motorola, and not countries. Know the worlds largest exporter? China. Germany was Nr. 2 but the US just overtook it slightly. And the US has recently lost much of its power in world politics. If developments continue the way they are, by 2020 the US'll be on place 5. Information from a study made by the Bertelsmann foundation. Most powerful country in the EU? Germany. Largest Economy in the EU? Germany. Where do you get fuel? Shell? BP? Netherlands and the UK. Most powerful person in the EU? Angela Merkel. Thats from Forbes. I find the US to be a nice country, but i don't like people that think its the worlds only country and the rest just... what? small holiday Islands? Stop being racist.Edited by and93hil - 7/18/12 at 10:16am

It's black and rounded like an iPad, but that's that. Different material, different quality, no one would mistake it for an iPad. It's not like those Samsung devices that, worst of all, even mimik the software.

I agree. The Tab was an obvious copy - and the courts seem to be accepting that. Xoom doesn't really look much like the iPad - which confirms that the patents are not all about shape.

At worst, this decision will help to create some standards for how design patents are to be interpreted.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

I agree. The Tab was an obvious copy - and the courts seem to be accepting that. Xoom doesn't really look much like the iPad - which confirms that the patents are not all about shape.
At worst, this decision will help to create some standards for how design patents are to be interpreted.

This was not the general sentiment when the case was initially filed. It was more of the "how dare they" rhetoric with the Xoom just like any other thing.